Welcome to DBSTalk

Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!

That. Doesn't really work out... If they saw that as being a competitive advantage when they had the channel, then they would now see not having it as a competitive disadvantage, and they sure don't seem to right now, so I don't think that was at all behind any of that process.

The marketing dept doesn't advertise your own competitive disadvantages. Never seen a DISH or Comcast ad "STILL WITHOUT SUNDAY TICKET!!"

Competitive advantages are actually more valuable and useable on the good side than competitive disadvantages are on the downside. And often competitive disadvantages you can spin as value/frugal cost advantage even further limiting the damage.

Of course, we'll never know for sure, and it is possible the bad blood had just gotten too bad over Voom. . . but I have a feeling that if DirecTV still didn't have AMC in HD, the odds a new DISH/AMC deal would have gotten done would have improved.

Computers are cheap. In the $300 range for some model on sale. I've seen them for less if you want to go refurbed. I don't think there are too many households with satellite TV that don't have at least one PC.

For that matter, DVD players are under $100.

I do realize that. We have a great Panny Blu-Ray that was very reasonable. To clarify, we just don't feel the need to purchase another computer and pay for an internet connection (for our home), as we are paying for this at work. (We're self-employed.) I'm sure that I spend more than enough time on it here!

JOY

Walking a fine line between intellectual curiosity and information overload!

but I have a feeling that if DirecTV still didn't have AMC in HD, the odds a new DISH/AMC deal would have gotten done would have improved.

I think it's a good point, though I would not say it would play much of a part. Dish was very mad at the Voom lawsuit, I'm not sure unless AMC allowed no carriage of WE and IFC would Dish have negotiated harder.

Is this the thread to report the Voom trial updates? If so, the latest says that "New York Supreme Court Judge Richard Lowe III was visibly angry with Dish Network (Thursday), thumping his desk as he accused the company of disrespecting the court, according to an account of the VOOM case proceedings from Andrew Harms of advisory firm Washington Analysis." Read the whole summary from Deadline.com here: http://www.deadline....sh-network-amc/

Wow. From the linked article:

New York Supreme Court Judge Richard Lowe III was visibly angry with Dish Network today, thumping his desk as he accused the company of disrespecting the court, according to an account of the VOOM case proceedings from Andrew Harms of advisory firm Washington Analysis. “I don’t care how much money you got,” Lowe’s quoted as saying to Dish lawyers after the company failed to comply with his order to turn over documents that he said were not privileged. If Dish doesn’t give him electronic copies of the material, he said, then he might rule in favor of AMC Networks in its $2.5B breach of contract suit before Dish even presents its case — leaving it to the jury to just decide on the size of the damages.

Lowe also told Dish’s lawyers that he might initiate an investigation to see which of them failed to follow his directions, according to Harms. ”I do not believe that he does not know” Lowe said, referring to one of the lawyers sitting in front. This is just the latest instance when Lowe has butted heads with Dish. Earlier he found that the company inappropriately destroyed emails that might have helped AMC, and charged that Dish had engaged in “blatant misconduct and attempts to delay” the trial.

It really looks like Dish has been legally mis-behaving in this thing, and such moves make their chances of winning this thing look slim.

It isn't like the courts don't get stuff wrong... I'm not defending Dish here exactly... but just because a judge rules something, doesn't make it factual... it just makes it legally enforceable. It wouldn't be the first time IF you find out after all this shakes out that the Judge had an axe to grind and was biased.

I'm not saying this is the case... I'm just saying, it could be... and we wouldn't find out until much later.

It isn't like the courts don't get stuff wrong... I'm not defending Dish here exactly... but just because a judge rules something, doesn't make it factual... it just makes it legally enforceable. It wouldn't be the first time IF you find out after all this shakes out that the Judge had an axe to grind and was biased.

I'm not saying this is the case... I'm just saying, it could be... and we wouldn't find out until much later.

Yeah, it could be that the Judge had a Dish installer drop a dish on his mother's kittens. But more likely it is what it seems.

Yeah, it could be that the Judge had a Dish installer drop a dish on his mother's kittens. But more likely it is what it seems.

Probably so... but it was worth the reminder that our court system is all too often like our sports competitions.

The best team doesn't always win... sometimes a less talented team wins. Nobody even has to cheat, but when a 2-14 team beats a 15-1 team nobody would argue the 2-14 team was overall the better team....

Similarly... people are convicted of things they actually didn't do AND let go for things they actually did... so it doesn't necessarily follow that because a judge "rules" something in the Dish vs Voom case that it makes it fact... it just makes it a judgment in court.

Probably so... but it was worth the reminder that our court system is all too often like our sports competitions.

The best team doesn't always win... sometimes a less talented team wins. Nobody even has to cheat, but when a 2-14 team beats a 15-1 team nobody would argue the 2-14 team was overall the better team....

Similarly... people are convicted of things they actually didn't do AND let go for things they actually did... so it doesn't necessarily follow that because a judge "rules" something in the Dish vs Voom case that it makes it fact... it just makes it a judgment in court.

Would you have posted the same thing if the rulings had gone against AMC and I had posted it doesn't look good for them?

(Just poking at you, bias is cool on web forums, in fact it is expected and makes them more fun. )

I was really hoping this whole issue would be taken care of before the premier of the new season of The Walking Dead.

Like all things, I know others could care less about AMC shows, but several of their shows are favorites of my family and I. Already missed the final season of Breaking Bad, am missing Hell on Wheels, and beginning tomorrow will sorely be missing The Walking Dead. It's only my humble opinion, but I feel my Dish subscription has lost roughly 20% of it's value.

Except. when you read reports of the trial, Dish had no real defense against the ruling that they destroyed key documents. And it isn't opinion, they did not turn over the documents he ordered them to turn over.

I get it if you have spent months making out AMC and their boss to be the bad guy, and defending Dish, but so far these haven't been controversial rulings. Yeah, you can say Jerry Sandusky has been accused and convicted of abusing a lot of young kids but, hey, that doesn't really mean anything since courts can be wrong, but sometimes you really have to be biased to ignore what's going on. Dish destroyed documents that were pertinent to the case, and said, oh, sorry. And they have refused to turn over documents the judge has repeatedly ordered them to turn over. It's not a matter of whether the glove fits.

Neighbor just called about the missing Walking Dead that starts tonight on AMC.
He already got a FREE Roku from Dish, now he also got a free $35 credit to pay for the Amazon Subscription to the Walking Dead to watch on the internet. Wow. Dish must be in this legal thing for the long run. Could be several more years of no AMC as I am sure if dish looses they will appeal to a higher court.

Except. when you read reports of the trial, Dish had no real defense against the ruling that they destroyed key documents. And it isn't opinion, they did not turn over the documents he ordered them to turn over.

I get it if you have spent months making out AMC and their boss to be the bad guy, and defending Dish, but so far these haven't been controversial rulings. Yeah, you can say Jerry Sandusky has been accused and convicted of abusing a lot of young kids but, hey, that doesn't really mean anything since courts can be wrong, but sometimes you really have to be biased to ignore what's going on. Dish destroyed documents that were pertinent to the case, and said, oh, sorry. And they have refused to turn over documents the judge has repeatedly ordered them to turn over. It's not a matter of whether the glove fits.

Exactly!!! Sometimes it seems like Dish will be defended no matter what. There could be a video tape of them destroying evidence that damns them and people will still defend them.It's TV guys and not a sports team. I just don't get why their defended to the death. Ok bad analogy but you get it.

Except. when you read reports of the trial, Dish had no real defense against the ruling that they destroyed key documents. And it isn't opinion, they did not turn over the documents he ordered them to turn over.

I get it if you have spent months making out AMC and their boss to be the bad guy, and defending Dish, but so far these haven't been controversial rulings. Yeah, you can say Jerry Sandusky has been accused and convicted of abusing a lot of young kids but, hey, that doesn't really mean anything since courts can be wrong, but sometimes you really have to be biased to ignore what's going on. Dish destroyed documents that were pertinent to the case, and said, oh, sorry. And they have refused to turn over documents the judge has repeatedly ordered them to turn over. It's not a matter of whether the glove fits.

As I understand things... Dish deleted some emails, Voom says those were important evidence that Dish destroyed... Dish says no, they are not, and that they were accidentally deleted by an automated process and they had no reason to save them.

The judge ruled that Dish "should have known" to save them, and as such is issuing instruction to the jury that Dish has been ruled to have destroyed evidence.

Those are the facts as I know them pertaining to the case.

HOWEVER... in terms of the real-world... since Dish destroyed the emails, and admits to doing so... and Voom apparently does not have copies of these emails... it is pure conjecture as to what they may or may not have contained relevant to the case! So... we don't know if Dish truly destroyed any evidence or not, there is no way to know this factually.

Hence... the judge made a ruling relevant to the court case... but it in no way means factually that Dish actually destroyed evidence.

That was the point I was making... just like why we say things like "allegedly" even if we feel confident that someone did something.

The ruling of a judge, jury, or court does not have to be a statement of fact. It is merely a decision of the judge, jury, and court... People win cases without evidence and lose cases with evidence all the time.

There is no bias here... You're seeing bias where there is none. In fact, that you are even bringing up the Voom lawsuit in this thread shows you are biased towards the AMC camp trying to convince everyone that the only reason Dish isn't carrying their channels is the unrelated lawsuit.

The lawsuit is the lawsuit... AMC carriage today (or lack thereof) is a horse of a different color.

Yes, one probably colors the conversation of the other... but don't forget... Dish carried AMC channels long after the Voom lawsuit... and Dish added AMC-HD during the Voom lawsuit as well. IF it was truly about the Voom lawsuit, we would have lost these channels years ago!

So... they surely play a part... but if AMC had made what Dish felt was a fair offer, we probably would still have the channels today.

Thus... the Voom lawsuit really has nothing to do with AMC at this point... and you show your bias by bringing it up.

All I was pointing out was that whether Dish did anything wrong or not related to that lawsuit, the judge's ruling doesn't say anything except he ruled that way. This would still be 100% my position if the same judge had instead ruled that Dish did not destroy documents relevant to the case. It would still be just a ruling, not a statement of fact, either way...

For that matter, Dish will likely have rulings go their way that do not necessarily reflect fact. That's the way our court system works, unfortunately.

Hey, I'm a new Dish customer within the last couple of weeks.. I switched because of the Pac12 and worried about missing AMC and the shows like Walking Dead and Madmen.. Just got off the phone and will be receiving a new ROKU and a $35 credit so I can stream from Amazon.com They also mentioned that this credit will continue to March for Madmen, should Dish not resolve the issue with AMC.. I know this has been posted before, but considering I am a BRAND NEW customer, this is very cool.

As I understand things... Dish deleted some emails, Voom says those were important evidence that Dish destroyed... Dish says no, they are not, and that they were accidentally deleted by an automated process and they had no reason to save them.

The judge ruled that Dish "should have known" to save them, and as such is issuing instruction to the jury that Dish has been ruled to have destroyed evidence.

Those are the facts as I know them pertaining to the case.

HOWEVER... in terms of the real-world... since Dish destroyed the emails, and admits to doing so... and Voom apparently does not have copies of these emails... it is pure conjecture as to what they may or may not have contained relevant to the case! So... we don't know if Dish truly destroyed any evidence or not, there is no way to know this factually.

Hence... the judge made a ruling relevant to the court case... but it in no way means factually that Dish actually destroyed evidence.

I'll try to find the more detailed info links and post them (in an airport right now.)

If you've ever been involved in a big lawsuit between a couple of companies (I have, more than once) you will find that you get a notice from the lawyers to "freeze" and protect a range of files, emails, etc. when there is the potential of a lawsuit. All automatic deletions are turned off on those, and the backups that large companies keep are also then gathered. One reason that companies have Records Retention rules is to ensure files and records are kept for defined periods of time due to just such occurrences.

In this case, a range of specific emails that were supposed to have been kept and produced were deleted. They clearly should not have been deleted. The State Supreme Court judge has handled many of these types of cases, and has ruled in favor of Dish on a number of issues in this case.

The other part, that you did not address, is the recent refusal of the attorneys to turn over the documents the judge has ordered them to turn over. He has made the order more than once, and the attorneys have simply refused to turn them over. Some of them are subscriber numbers that are being challenged and core to the case.

I have no bias in this case, as I don't know facts beyond what is being disclosed in court. If the other side had been doing what Dish was doing, I would have posted that it looks bad for them and good for Dish. But when the judge gets angry at attorneys because they repeatedly refuse to turn over the evidence he has ordered them to turn over, and the response is "Oh, that doesn't mean anything, it could just be the judge doesn't like them" or similar, it sounds like denial. Especially from someone who has gone out of their way to nitpick every comment from the AMC CEO and post everything you could find to show how bad they are.

It is really simpler than you are trying to make it. Dish has twice been admonished by the judge for refusing to turn over evidence, in one case destroying it, in the other refusing repeatedly to turn it over. Unless you just refuse to believe Dish could be in the wrong, the simple analysis is that Dish is holding back evidence.

OJ could be innocent. Jerry Sandusky is still saying he never touched a kid. Hey, that's how our court system works, right? It's not perfect, obviously (I'm currently testifying as an expert in a case in which a homeowner is suing a company over a fire that he is blaming on a paint company, even though he did not follow the label instructions, stuffed oily rags in a hot enclosed corner of his garage, etc. and, while it is amazing to me that this even made it to court, it is pretty impressive how well the judge is handling some complex issues the attorneys are throwing at him.)

All I really said was... you can't say Dish destroyed evidence. Nobody knows this except Dish.

What you can say is that Dish deleted some emails that Voom says they should have kept AND Voom suspects them of destroying evidence... and so the judge ruled in favor of Voom.

That's it.

Dish may very well have destroyed evidence... but we'll never know for certain, because they deleted those emails.

It might seem like semantics, but it isn't... especially not in court.

So... then the more recent Voom asking for some documents, Dish saying they are private, the judge disagreeing and asking them to turn them over... then Voom says Dish didn't give them all... and Dish says yes they did... and the judge comes back with "you don't have any credibility here."

The problem with that, and where it shows judge bias to me... is that IF the judge is saying Dish has no credibility... what's the point of continuing the trial? I mean, that sure sounds like the judge had made up his mind and will be coloring the trial with his already bias that nothing Dish says is trustworthy... and the jury will get wind of that as well eventually.

That's what I mean about bias. The judge should be there to make rulings... allow or disallow things... and so forth. The judge in a jury trial should not be saying things like that while the trial is ongoing.

IF he doesn't trust Dish, based on past behavior... fine... Dish may have earned that... but the judge should be handling that better.

All I really said was... you can't say Dish destroyed evidence. Nobody knows this except Dish.

What you can say is that Dish deleted some emails that Voom says they should have kept AND Voom suspects them of destroying evidence... and so the judge ruled in favor of Voom.

That's it.

Dish may very well have destroyed evidence... but we'll never know for certain, because they deleted those emails.

It might seem like semantics, but it isn't... especially not in court.

So... then the more recent Voom asking for some documents, Dish saying they are private, the judge disagreeing and asking them to turn them over... then Voom says Dish didn't give them all... and Dish says yes they did... and the judge comes back with "you don't have any credibility here."

The problem with that, and where it shows judge bias to me... is that IF the judge is saying Dish has no credibility... what's the point of continuing the trial? I mean, that sure sounds like the judge had made up his mind and will be coloring the trial with his already bias that nothing Dish says is trustworthy... and the jury will get wind of that as well eventually.

That's what I mean about bias. The judge should be there to make rulings... allow or disallow things... and so forth. The judge in a jury trial should not be saying things like that while the trial is ongoing.

IF he doesn't trust Dish, based on past behavior... fine... Dish may have earned that... but the judge should be handling that better.

If the emails in question where sent back and forth between voom and dish, I'm with you 100%, you can't know one way or the other, and since voom obviously didn't keep a copy of them, that's their tuff luck IMHO. However, if voom has kept all their emails and dish got rid of theirs, I blame dish for stupidity, and wanting to make sure that there was no way anything that may have been said could in any way come back to bit them.

With that said, all this legal wrangling, and amc believe they are worth more than they see to be, I don't see amc back for a very long time.

It will be interesting to see the sub numbers from both sat companies for this quarter, and then again, especially after the first of the year. They will be very telling of how some of these channels that are missing will be affecting both companies.